Pastor Hurst

IS IT OUT OF THE BAG?

Sometimes the smallest of ironies fascinate me. At church during the winter I station bags of ice melt and a snow shovel at the main entrances of our buildings. Recently, before the first snows I just done so with new unopened bags. Later, after a snow, I had gone to clean the entrance ways of the buildings before Sunday School. One of the buildings has no porch above the entrance. There, leaning against the building by the door was an unopened bag of ice melt, its top piled high with snow. The irony struck me: Ice melt is suppose to melt snow; yet, here was a bag of ice melt covered in the very snow it is suppose to melt. The reason the ice melt didn't melt the snow, put simply, is that ice melt cannot do what it is supposed to do when kept closed up inside the bag. It must be outside the bag to have any effect on the snow and ice. Kept inside, closed off, shut up, from the snow, the snow can be right there lying on it, and the ice melt has no effect at all. Technically, this ice melt is not "salt." We use this combination because it is easier on the concrete. However, we used to use only salt. Thus, I begin to reflect on Jesus' proclamation that we believers are the "salt of the earth." We truly are that. Yet, like the ice melt, if the Good News, the effects of the Kingdom it brings, are kept shut up, closed off, within us, never shared, never expressed, never manifested, then we will never have the effect of salt upon our world. We can rub shoulders with those of the world, be right there in that environment at work and school, and yet never influence or affect this world. I brushed off the snow, opened the bag, and scattered the ice melt over the area I had just shoveled. I hardly had finished sowing it when I heard the popping and crackling sounds as it went to work. It was working because it was out of the bag, in direct contact.. For the individual believer there should be no compartmentalizing, partioning off, of his faith during his interaction with this world. For the church, there must be no isolating, withdrawal, of itself from the community where it is located. The salt must be out of the bag, scattered, and in direct contact. Contained by and behind the veneer of the plastic of the bag, the salt has no effect though right there in and covered by the snow. It must be out of the bag. Our faith, too, must be out of the bag. If snow is piled onto of it, the salt is not out of the bag. If the world is piled onto of the believer, the salt is not out of the bag. Where's your salt? Is it out of the bag?

GRACE IN YOUR FACE

It came out spontaneously: "Grace in your face." I was discussing with a friend how some who have been raised in a legalistic environment have had an euphoric Lutheran/Galatian experience. They suddenly get it that salvation is truly by grace through faith in Jesus, that they cannot merit God's approval or acceptance even after they are born again. The question we had been discussing was "Can someone have such a revolutionary experience freeing them from legalism and not let the pendulum swing too far in the opposite direction into libertarianism." My observation was that so often these liberated from legalism develop an attitude-and here it came-an attitude, a grace-in-your-face attitude. Suddenly, they flaunt their "Christian liberty" doing things they know others feel strongly ought not to be done by Christians. They get in your face with it. They protest, "It's all by grace; works don't matter." Grace in your face. Something about this arrogant, libertine attitude seems to me totally contrary to the grace they claim. If one truly realizes salvation is all by grace, being liberated from the taskmaster, Salvation-by-your-works, wouldn't that make that person so grateful he would be permeated with humility? Isn't the boast, "I can take this and that liberty because I've been liberated by grace," as prideful as "I am righteous because I fulfill the holiness code, the list of rules of things I have to do or not do"? Grace in the face is bad. So is the pack on the back-the burden of personal convictions, list of rules, and code of expected behavior, a duplicate of the legalist's own burden, that he tries to put on others' back. If a person has been truly liberated by grace, he will be humble because he is overwhelmingly grateful. If a person has a life characterized by separation and holy living, he will be humble because he realizes any true holiness is not self-produced but a work of God in his life. Neither grace in the face or a pack on the back does anybody any good, appeals to no unbeliever. However, humble gratitude, that is far more appealing to those who need Christ.

FAITH WITHOUT DOUBT? I DOUBT IT

It seems that quite often, as pastor, I have a believer come to me bothered, not so much by his doubts themselves, but by the fact that he doubts. That really disturbs some. "How can I really believe, how can I have faith when I doubt?" The answer, I believe, is simply this: Faith is not the absence of doubt but a response to doubt. In fact, I think it impossible to have faith without doubt. In the end, faith is a decision to put one's trust in something. None can chose to put faith in something without there being some kind of questioning. There has to be something he is choosing against, or there would be no choice. Though not doubt in all its connotations, this is doubt. Without delving into a discussion of the varied nature of doubt, indulge me this simple contrast between doubt as wrong and doubt that isn't wrong: Doubt that is wrong is a willful refusing to put one's confidence in God. Doubt that isn't wrong is an uncertainty. This uncertainty is an honest questioning that arises from trying to reconcile what one knows and hears about God (or from God) with the apparent realities of his life. We see this difference in the Christmas story in the response of Zachariah and Mary when each respectively was told they were to have a child. Both basically responded to Gabriel with a question, "How is this to be?" Zachariah was thinking of his and his wife's advanced age. Mary was thinking of the fact that she had not had relations with a male. If their response was basically the same, why was Zachariah rebuked with dumbness and Mary, receiving no rebuke, was given a further explanation? Why? Because Zachariah refused to believe, to put confidence in the message from God via the angel. Mary believed that it would happen but struggled to reconcile her prophesied conception with the reality of her being a virgin. Zachariah's doubt was a refusal to put confidence in God's Word. Mary's "doubt" was a questioning of how to reconcile God's Word with the apparent facts of her life. Zachariah doubted that it would take place. Mary believed it would take place by only questioned how. This isn't parsing semantic differences. It is revealing an attitude of heart. It shows that faith is a heart response to doubt. Mary chose to believe although she questioned (doubted) how she would conceive. If you believe you can have faith without doubt, then you did so by doubting the explanation of what I wrote above. Thus, your faith in faith without doubt was a response to your doubt of my thoughts. Can one have faith without doubt? I doubt it.

TRUTH TORMENTS

It is said of joking that it hurts because there is a grain of truth in it. This reality doesn't justify such joking but illustrates the fact that Truth can hurt. Not only does it hurt, it angers. Once on YouTube I watched a video clip of a street preacher in San Francisco simply declaring what the Bible says about sins including homosexuality. He was measuredly proclaiming what the Bible said without any mean- spirited, ad hominem attack. The homosexuals surrounding him were raging at him, spitting out venomous tirades, "You're a bigot. You're judging. You're intolerant. You're a hater." Of course, they were exhibiting those very things of which they were accusing the street preacher. Why were they so vitriolic? Why were they so angry? If the preacher was just an idiot with archaic beliefs, why not just ignore him and walk away? Why were they so upset and reacting so? Because what he was saying was God's Word, the Truth, and being the Truth, it pricked their conscience, it made them uncomfortable, irate. If rejected, the Truth will torment. In Revelation 11 the narrative records the future world-wide celebration when the Two Witnesses are slaughtered and left lying in the street. It also notes that the celebration arises from the joyous relief from the silencing of the Witnesses' prophecies which had tormented the people of the world. Why were these prophecies of Truth torment? Because the people unrepentantly rejected the Truth of them. Think of Stephen of Acts. As he preached the Truth, they gnashed their teeth at him with maniacal anger. Why? The Truth tormented them. It tormented them because they rejected it. The Truth strikes any remaining chords of conscience, twinges innate awareness of our created design and purpose. As a piercing thorn triggers the nerves sending pain signals to the brain, so Truth triggers the spiritual nervous system of the human. However, the torment of Truth, or, should I say, the continuing torment of pain, is the simple effect of rejecting Truth. The torment of the pain of rejected Truth results in this unbridled anger. It need not be. Truth rejected is torment. Truth accepted will set free.

WHY YOUR KID'S BEDROOM IS A MESS

I haven’t become a papist, but, curiosity being the motive, on a long road trip I recently began an audio book of the biography of the current pope. All Truth is God’s truth whether it comes from Paul, Plato, or the Pope. (Of course, only Paul was inspired of God.) In the book it was noted that Pope has said what I have tried to accurately quote here following: “It shouldn’t be about what kind of world we leave our children, but what kind of children we leave our world.” That is Truth. That reveals the error of contemporary societies. The philosophical assumption today is that man’s problems arise from the context of his environment. If a human has the right opportunities in his environment, he will be a good, prosperous, well-adjusted, happy individual. If enough money is thrown into education, equal-opportunity employment, housing, etc., a human will turn out good. Oh, the stated objective of a better world is cloaked in terms like “peace,” “equality,” “access to health care,” etc. But, the underlying gist is, if man could just be handed the right world, he would be right, do right, have what is right. The assumption is wrong. It is the cart before the horse. Originally, it isn’t societies that make people what they are. It is people that make societies what they are. There is no denying society’s influence on people. Yet, ultimately, people are not cruel, evil, selfish, etc., because of the world in which they live. The world in which they live is cruel, evil, selfish, etc., because of the people who live in it. A better world doesn’t make better people. Better people make a better world. Children are not in trouble because of the world they are growing up in. Our world is in trouble because of the way children are growing up in the world. The kid isn’t sloppy because his bedroom is a wreck. His bedroom is a wreck because he is sloppy. The parent (or social authorities) can clean up his room but the kid will continue to be sloppy and soon his bedroom will be a mess again. However, if that child is taught be example, expectation and inspection to be neat, orderly, and clean, his bedroom will be the same. I may not be able to leave my children a better world. But, I can leave children who will better the world. More importantly, I can leave children that whatever their world, live in such a way that they are prepared for the next, the truly better world.

CHURCH APPRECIATION

I’m not sure who did initiated it, but October has been designated Pastor Appreciation Month. Union Pentecostal has always been so kind to us in observing that occasion, but I note that there is no Church Appreciation month. I can’t do anything about that, but I can designate this bulletin column my own Church Appreciation Page: I appreciate our church, the people of Union Pentecostal Church. I appreciate... 1. Their faithfulness: Our Sunday night services are almost as well attended as Sunday morning. We have workers who have taught classes, driven buses, done outreach, maintained buildings and vehicles for years upon years never varying. Our choir directors and choir members meet for practice early before services year after year. 2. Their care and kindness: Over and over I have watched our church family open its arms to new folk and new converts, whatever their past or present difficulties. I have watched as some of these new folk have taken advantage of, been ungrateful, or suddenly abandoned our church. Yet, the next time someone who needs ministered to shows up, those arms are opened again. 3. Their giving to and involvement in outreach. People give abundantly, not only to missionary and benevolent ministries, but to reach out to folks in our area. Thousands of dollars are contributed each year to our children’s outreach alone. 4. Their hunger for the Word. Folks at Union Pentecostal could do as so many others have and desert the preaching that exposits what the Word actually says and follow after a tickle-the-ear, massage-the-spiritual-ego, packaging of pop psychology in Gospel phrases or of positive thinking in a God-wants-you-to-prosper message. Instead, they listen intently to and desire the word from the Word that God actually intended. 5. Their sincere worship. There may be Pentecostal churches where the worship is more active and louder, but there is no doubt of the sincerity and earnestness of this church’s worship. There are many other things, but I must also say I appreciate... 6. Their love and appreciation shown to their pastors. I really appreciate that. It may be only a page and not a month or day, but Church, you are appreciated.